Attila Lendvai writes:
>> instead of calling for
>> the proliferation of private channels, a different kind of unmanageable
>> structurelessness.
>
> not private channels, simply channels that are not owned/controlled by
> the exact same set of committers as guix proper, and not demanding the
>
On 2025-01-16 15:34, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
>> The complexity is due to the requirements of not bumping the channel
>> introduction (to avoid the increased attack surface from having to
>> keep obtaining the updated one, as I discussed earlier), keeping fork
>> history intact (to avoid force
Hi Guix,
I have seen different opinions [1][2] regarding sending pings to patches
that aren't getting reviewed or are otherwise lacking attention.
To get a better idea of peoples' opinions, I've created a survey. Please
do take it, it's only two questions long.
https://sneakmonkey.limesurvey.net
Am Freitag, dem 17.01.2025 um 09:32 + schrieb 45mg:
> Hi Guix,
>
> I have seen different opinions [1][2] regarding sending pings to
> patches that aren't getting reviewed or are otherwise lacking
> attention.
>
> To get a better idea of peoples' opinions, I've created a survey.
> Please do ta
> instead of calling for
> the proliferation of private channels, a different kind of unmanageable
> structurelessness.
not private channels, simply channels that are not owned/controlled by the
exact same set of committers as guix proper, and not demanding the exact same
requirements from the
Hi Liliana,
Thanks for taking the survey!
Liliana Marie Prikler writes:
> For context, I already took the survey, but here are some comments that
> didn't quite make the cut for lack of a free-form field with additional
> concerns:
I had assumed the 'Other:' option could be used for additional
Hello,
> Registration for Guix days is closed because we have 60 people signed
> up. Sadly we can only handle so many. If you changed your mind, you
> can remove your name from the list so we can let someone in.
In such a case please put me on the list. Thank you.
Cheers,
Bost
> Im marked down for two days, but I will be going to the Friday event (im
> going to a community metrics event on the Thursday).
> Also Im stepping out for a lecture at 230 PM on the Friday.
>
> Perhaps whoever has the stamina to navigate the buggy FSF site can
> update that detail, so that they c
Im marked down for two days, but I will be going to the Friday event (im
going to a community metrics event on the Thursday).
Also Im stepping out for a lecture at 230 PM on the Friday.
Perhaps whoever has the stamina to navigate the buggy FSF site can
update that detail, so that they can add t
Cool,
... Im still trying to work out what day of the week that the Day
`futurile` occupies...
On 2025-01-17 18:14, Rostislav Svoboda wrote:
Im marked down for two days, but I will be going to the Friday event
(im
going to a community metrics event on the Thursday).
Also Im stepping out for
Saturanya Rahjane de Lasca writes:
>> Again, not disputing that things work fine for people with commit
>> access. Perhaps that is part of why this issue hasn't been addressed
>> before :P
> You may call us privileged – and yes, we are – but that doesn't change
> the fact that weakening security
Liliana Marie Prikler writes:
>> All of these things discussed in this thread are technically
>> possible. But I think that we all agree that the friction involved,
>> compared to just using my own fork with the patch applied, is much
>> larger, at least in my opinion.
> Yes, we can agree that t
Simon Tournier skribis:
>> Perhaps the “Decision Making” section could stress that, with a
>> paragraph above “To learn …” along these lines:
>>
>> Consensus building requires that participants share a common goal,
>> trust each other to act in good faith, listen to one another’s
>> concern
13 matches
Mail list logo
